An Evaluation of Black Bear Management Options

_An_Evaluation_of Black_Bear _Management_Options Northeast Black Bear Technical Committee, August 2012 An_Evaluation_of_Black_ Bear_Management_Options _Table of Contents Acknowledgements______________________________________________________ 3 Northeast_Black_Bear_Technical_Committee_ _________________________________ 3 Introduction___________________________________________________________ 4 _ Brief History of Bear Management in the Northeast________________________________________ 5 The Changing Landscape of Bear Management & Human-Bear Conflicts_________________________ 7 Biological_Carrying_Capacity_vs_Cultural_Carrying_Capacity Black Bear Management Strategies_ . 8 Population_Management Human-Bear_Problem_Management Black_Bear_Population_Management_____________________________________ 9 Regulated Hunting & Trapping_______________________________________________________10 Control Non-Hunting Mortality_ . 12 Habitat Management_ . 14 Fertility Control_ . 16 Allow Nature to Take Its Course_ . 18 Human_Bear_Conflict_Management_ ____________________________________ 20 Public Education_ . 21 Exclusion Devices for Food & Waste Management_ . 23 Aversion Conditioning_ . 25 Repellents_ . 27 Kill Permits_ . 28 Capture & Kill_ . 30 Translocation_ . 31 Damage Compensation Programs or Reimbursement Fund_ . 33 Supplemental Feeding_ . 35 Conclusions____________________________________________________________ 37 Literature_Cited_________________________________________________________ 38 An Evaluation of Black Bear Management Options Acknowledgements An Evaluation of Black Bear Management Options was co-edited by The_Northeast_Black_Bear_ Jeremy E. Hurst, with the New York State Department of Environ- Technical_Committee mental Conservation, Christopher W. Ryan and Colin P. Carpenter is a group of professional bear with the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, and Jaime L. biologists from northeastern Sajecki with the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisher- United States and eastern Ca- ies. Regional contributions and technical review were provided by nadian provinces committed to agency biologists who serve as members of the Northeast Black the study and wise management Bear Technical Committee, National Park Service biologists, Wild- of our black bear resources. life Conservation Society and additional black bear biologists in the southeastern United States. Booklet layout and formatting were provided by staff from the Bureau of Information and Education of the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Significant portions of this document were drawn from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries’ Black Bear Management Plan (VDGIF 2002), the Penn- sylvania Game Commission’s Black Bear Management Plan (PGC 2005), and additional state and provincial black bear management plans provided by representative members of the Northeast Black Bear Technical Committee. This document was prompted, reviewed and approved by the Northeast Wildlife Administrators Association. A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Northeast Black Bear Technical Committee 3 Introduction Introduction Archaeological excavations and historical records indicate that Native Americans and early European settlers had a strong connection to the black bear. Bear meat was used as a source of protein, hides were fashioned into garments and blankets, fat was used to fuel lanterns and as a waterproofing agent, and bones and claws were made into tools and decorations. Today, black bears are used for many of the same purposes and are prized as a trophy animal for hunters and trappers alike. In addition, black bears provide a unique wildlife viewing experience and add a touch of wildness to the habitats in which they occur. Black bears are the most common and widespread of the three bear species in North America. Although their historical distribution was larger, today black bears are found in at least 40 states and all Canadian provinces. In the eastern United States, black bear range is continuous throughout New England and the Appalachian Mountains but is fragmented throughout the southeast and along the eastern seaboard. The incredibly adaptable nature of black bears enables them to occupy a greater range of habitats than any other bear species. This ability coupled with recent increases in black bear numbers and humans moving into black bear habitat have led to increased human-bear conflicts. In addition, black bears are drawn in to human occupied areas by easily acquired food sources. As both bear and human populations expand, there is increased concern for public safety and property damage and need for management agencies to employ a variety of bear management options. The objective of this booklet is to explain the rationale behind bear management decisions and to discuss the utility of various management options. Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) photo An Evaluation of Black Bear Management Options 4 Introduction Brief History of Bear Management in the Northeast Throughout much of northeast- Passage of the Federal Aid in featured protection from unregu- ern North America, management Wildlife Restoration Act (better lated hunting. Today, efforts are of black bears has followed a known as the Pittman-Robertson directed toward maintenance of similar trend. Following the Act) in 1937 marked the begin- bear populations at levels in- near extirpation of bears due to ning of modern-day wildlife tended to: (1) ensure sustainable extensive cutting of forests, mar- management in the United bear populations now and in the ket hunting and bounties, many States. This act earmarked future; (2) provide hunting and states and provinces enacted income from an existing excise viewing opportunities of bears laws that regulated the taking of tax on sporting arms and am- for licensed hunters, wildlife bear in the 1900s. Bears were munition for use in wildlife photographers and wildlife view- listed as game species in some management, restoration, re- ers; and (3) minimize conflicts jurisdictions and were fully pro- search, and land acquisition. between bears and people. tected in others. Early bear management efforts Chemically immobilized bear. Northeast Black Bear Technical Committee 5 Introduction Through the combined benefits harvest through regulated hunt- equally to all, regulated by law of regulated hunting, public ing remains the most effective or rule-making with public land purchases, forest matura- tool for managing bear popula- involvement rather than market tion, bear restoration efforts, and tions throughout the region. pressures, wealth, social status management-based research, or land ownership. Management bear populations have grown These cultural, social, and man- policy and decisions are rooted and expanded their range across agement values of hunting are in science and support an ethic eastern and northeastern North reinforced in the North American of fair-chase and legitimate use America. Black bears now occur Model of Wildlife Conserva- (e.g., fur and food) of harvested in nearly every northeastern state tion (Geist et al. 2001), a se- wildlife. Adherence to these and province in North America. ries of principles that underpin tenets has allowed game man- black bear management in the agement to function successfully Black bear hunting is a long- northeast and throughout North while retaining strong support standing tradition for many America. At the heart of the among the generally non-hunting families in the northeast, provid- model is the concept of wildlife public. For this reason, black ing a valuable source of food, a as a public resource, owned by bear management programs means of shared recreation and no one but held in trust by the throughout the northeast are an opportunity to pass-on family government for the benefit of based upon the principles of the traditions and appreciation for the people. Further, access to North American Model of Wild- nature. Additionally, black bear wildlife by hunters is provided life Conservation. Animal Rights and Black Bear Management Trends_in_wildlife-related_recreation_and_public_attitudes_toward_wildlife_use_have_implications_for_black_ bear_management._Non_hunting_wildlife_recreation_(e.g.,_wildlife_viewing)_has_increased_significantly_ over_the_last_several_decades_(Duda_et_al._1998),_and_advocates_of_animal_rights_and_animal_welfare_ have_begun_to_exert_more_influence_on_wildlife_management_decisions_(Muth_et_al._2002)._Proponents_ of_animal_welfare_believe_that_human_use_of_animals_is_appropriate_as_long_as_practical_measures_are_ taken_to_ensure_that_human_use_does_not_cause_undue_pain_and_suffering_to_animals._Professional_ wildlife_biologists,_hunters_and_trappers_are_supporters_of_animal_welfare_(Organ_et_al._1996)._However,_ animal_rights_proponents_advocate_equal_moral_and_legal_rights_for_all_species_with_a_motive_to_end_any_ human_use_of_animals_(Cockrell_1999,_Muth_and_Jamison_2000)._ In_several_northeastern_states_and_provinces,_activism_by_animal_rights_proponents_has_in_some_cases_ compromised_bear_managers’_ability_to_control_black_bear_populations_by_limiting_bear_hunting_oppor- tunities_(e.g.,_periodic_cancellation_of_bear_seasons)_or_specific_harvest_techniques_(e.g.,_restrictions_on_ bear_trapping_or_the_use_of_dogs_to_hunt_bears)._Yet_the_dependence_on_and_use_of_renewable_natural_ resources_such_as_black_bears,_fosters_stewardship_of_those_resources. An Evaluation of Black Bear Management Options 6 Introduction The Changing Landscape of Bear Management and Human-Bear Conflicts

Load more